Tuesday, December 30, 2008

I just found out about this absurd bit of drivel on YouTube. Now, this video, named "The Politics of P" features someone who claims to be a woman, or more specifically a "transwoman." In fact, in the video they ask the question..."Does the preference to pee standing up make me less of a woman..." The answer, simply put, is an unequivocal YES!!!! This person is as "transgender" as they come. He is not a woman, and he certainly is not someone who has HBS. He has a very bizarre idea of what being a woman is about. No question, this person certainly "passes" visually, though the voice is clearly male. As is the brain, and really, that is what matters.View the video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRDvnPSmT2I

Thursday, December 25, 2008

The transgender types are up in arms because, as they wish to put it, "The Pope has attacked transsexuals." Now, two things quickly become obvious....first, the transgender types did not actually pay any attention to what the Pope actually said (or perhaps, don't want to) and second, they have suddenly decided that by calling themselves "transsexual" they can further muddy the waters, since many of them have absolutely zero desire to give up their penises. They remind me of the old gun nut bumper stickers...."They will take my penis when they pry my cold dead fingers from it."Actually, the Pope did not specifically mention transsexuals. He spoke out against so-called "gender theory," which is at the heart of much of what defines "transgender," not true transsexualism which is now increasingly referred to as Harry Benjamin Syndrome. Of course, I realize that the Pope probably does not truly understand the difference, since he is advised by people like Paul McHugh who is deliberately ignorant of the facts.No, what the Pope was speaking out against is the theory that came out of radical feminism which holds that "gender" is all a social construct, and that people should be free to decide such matters for themselves. Except, of course, that the most radical practitioners are very unhappy unless they actually decision is to either stick with the gender considered appropriate for one's birth sex or to be some sort of gender queer. Being HBS is usually not consider an acceptable "choice." And of course, in "gender theory" it is all a choice. Biology is not considered an acceptable explanation. What is odd about this is the fact that LGBT dogma holds that homosexuality is always congenital. But being transgender is usually held to be a choice. And what is even odder is that the evidence that gender is inherent is pretty much insurmountable, while the evidence that homosexuality is never a choice is still lacking. Now, it is pretty certain that some people are born homosexual, and that others make a choice. Simply observing behavior in prisons should make it obvious that some choose homosexual behavior when they have no other option for sex. When their situation changes, they return to being straight. And it is certainly true that transgender people clearly choose to rebel against their inherent gender.

I agree with the Pope that "gender theory" is invalid, and that it poses threats to societal order. While I have no desire to force people's behavior, that does not mean that I am going to approve of it either.

Pope Paul VI had not problem with the surgical treatment of transsexuals since it improved people's lives. The current Pope is influenced by people who claim the opposite, but who do so by ignoring the clear evidence. The Pope is right about "gender theory" but is mislead about those who have HBS. I believe if he had more accurate facts, his views would be different.No, in spite of what you read, the Pope did not attack transsexuals. He did attack "gender theory" which is favored by many, if not most, who style themselves as "transgender activists." And that is why they are so dead set on attacking him for simply speaking the truth.

Thursday, December 4, 2008

As I have pointed out in the past, I, like most HBS survivors, object strongly to being referred to as "transgender." A couple of recent items that are floating around the web show why we have such strong objections to the label.

The first is the now well-known story of Stu Rasmussen, the recently elected mayor of Silverton, Oregon. Now, for those who have not heard of Stu, well he is quite the character. He is quite open about being a crossdresser. That is, perhaps, shocking enough. But he does not stop there. Even though he rather admantly identifies as a straight male, he has taken at least one step to alter his body, having had breast augmentation. He wrote an article about the experience for Transgender Tapestry under the name Carla Fong.

Now, admittedly, Stu is a rather extreme example, but how anyone could possibly think that an HBS woman (or man for that matter) has anything in common with someone like this is beyond me. Stu makes no attempt to actually be a woman. He just likes, as he puts, being "...a heterosexual male who appears to be a female." A favorite t-shirt of his anwers the obvious question, "Why?" It reads simply, “Because girls have more fun.”

Now, some "transgender" activists are thrilled over Stu's victory. I mean, you can't get much more "transgender" than him. And that pretty much says it all.

Now, don't get me wrong. I think Stu has every right to live his life however he wishes. It is kind of a puzzle to me, but it is his life. But, I'll be honest. I doubt I would vote for such a person for mayor. I would have serious questions about any such person.

Another good example comes from that bastion of weirdness, Bilerico, and was posted by none other than Monica Roberts, who we have written about previously. It is a little ditty Roberts wrote to be sung to the tune of "Santa Baby."

Santa Baby (Transgender Version)Sung to the tune of Santa Baby by Eartha Kitt

Santa Baby, just slip some hormones under the tree,For me.

Been an awful good girl, Santa Baby,

So hurry down the chimney tonight.

Santa Baby, I need some electrolysis, tooI do.

I'll wait up for you dear, Santa Baby,So hurry down the chimney tonight.

Santa I am being dissed.'Cause I was born a mister and Not born a miss

Now, this bit of silliness, courtesy of Monica Roberts, exhibits quite a bit of the "transgender" mindset, which often treats SRS as a sort of fantasy...not something one necessarily actually has, but as a sort of a fun thing to dream about. The original song is bad enough...but this is really awful. The lyrics seem to show a lack of real understanding of the realities of correction for HBS women. And the terminology seems to be right out of the autogynephile playbook. I imagine it would be a real hit at Asia SF, a San Francisco nightclub the features the finest in "gender illusionists."

Hey, the transgender can have their fantasies and their weird behavior, just as long as they leave me out of it. But that is really the heart of the problem. They keep insisting on dragging people with HBS under their little umbrella, and worse, they expect us to step to the front and be more visible.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Well, after making some polite comments in support of an article on the Bilerico Project website, and enduring more than a few insults, I have just discovered that I was banned. Worse, the message in which they stated this is untrue. A while back, I was given a suspension, and was told I could return as a registered user after a week or two. I forget the exact time period. When a topic I was interested in was posted, I decided to comment, and joined. Of course, anyone who actually refutes he pary line of certain there is going to be booted. In fact, I am surprised they even allowed the post I responded to, as it was contrary to what is acceptable.This is typical of certain people who can be though of, collectively, as the Gender Fascists. Their view is that gender is a social construct, that transsexualism has no legitimate basis, generally that SRS is not only unneeded but is actualy "evil" and that anyone should be able to change their "sex" simply by saying they have changed their sex. Contradict them, and you are going to pay the price of being insulted. Actually refute their arguments and you will be shown the door.

It used to be said that reality is for those who can't handle drugs. I guess Bilerico is perfect for those who can't handle reality.What are they so afraid of? That is simple. They are afraid of the truth.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The "transgender" community is thrilled, as well they might be, over the decision handed down by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the case of Diane J. Schroer vs. James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress. Unfortunately, while this case represents, at least for the moment, a great victory for the transgender, it has the potential to turn out to be a horrible case for those with Harry Benjamin Syndrome.

First off, the case can, and may very likely will, be overturned on appeal. Schroer's case is not a particularly strong one, and the Library of Congress raised some issues that, while perhaps not valid in fact, are not invalid in principle. That is, the LOC can argue that they were not really acting out of prejudice, but out of genuine concern, and a higher court may well accept that reasoning.

Schroer is a classic example of transgender, not HBS. Schroer had a long and successful career as a male. There is no evidence in Schoer's past to show any signs of HBS, or even of gender identity disorder prior to the decision, rather late in life, to transtion. Schroer is another man who has decided to retire as a woman.

Now, not everyone with HBS will transition early in life. Some will, usually because of family or religion, delay transition. For others, it was simply a lack of resources (30 years ago, it was a lot harder to find a qualified therapist if you lived in much of the country). And in many cases, people might well have been mislead by the information that was available to them at the time. I do believe that 30 years in the future, late transition among those with HBS will be almost unheard of. But one thing that is characteristic of those with HBS who transition late is a lifetime of issues related to their condition. They are likely to have led absolutely miserable lives. Someone who is forced, for whatever reason, to endure life with a brain that is at odds with their body is not going to have had a happy existence. And that unhappiness is going to affect all areas of their life.

Unfortunately, when someone like Schroer comes along, it raises troubling questions about what is really going on. By all accounts, Schroer had an outstanding and successful career in the military. And not just the military, but as a member of the Special Forces, i.e. a Green Beret. This is one of the most elite units of the U.S. Army. It should be noted that women have never been allowed to joint the Special Forces. This is an area of the military that is strictly limited to men. Schoer apparently had no trouble fitting into this group, which is notorious for being hard to join. Currently, those wishing to become Green Berets have to go through three levels of training. The first, includes advanced infantry and Airborne. After that, only 35% make it through the second round, and then only 20% of those make it through the third round. That seems to present pretty good evidence that Schroer was not the least bit troubled by the supposed disconnect between his body and his brain.

And that presents the major problem with this case. Here is a person who clearly made a choice to "become" a woman. There is virtually no hope of actually arguing that Schoer suffers from any sort of medical condition that was present from birth. That means that a discrimination case that could easily negatively impact people with HBS, not because it actually involves an HBS person, but because the transgender activists insist on dragging us under their "umbrella," a case which could, quite easily, make it to the Supreme Court, is based on behavior, not an intrinsic trait. And such a case could easily result in a precedent that discrmination based on the "behavior" of being "transgender." which would be broadly, and incorrectly interpreted, becoming the law of the land.And this is typical of the transgender mindset. They would rather go down in glorious defeat, taking HBS people with them, than actually make some progress for those they claim to include. It is simply not acceptable that people who have had surgery can change their birth certificates. The law must allow anyone to claim to be a different sex. It isn't good enough if a law prevents people for being fired for what they do on their own time, men must be allowed to show up in dresses when the mood strikes them. They push for the ridiculous, and laws that might actually accomplish some good never make it past the point of being a joke.Some of the reasons the LOC gave for not hiring Schoer are not remotely legitimate. But when they raised the question of how Schoer's transition might affect the ability to testify before Congress, they brought up a legitimate question. And again, this points up a problem with the transgender mindset. Clearly, Schoer does not really want to be a "woman," but desires to be a transgender person instead. Being in such a public situation, where his past would be a major issue, and would lead to the possibility of regular publicity, would be be horrifying for an HBS person. There would be no chance of being taken seriously as a woman. Why anyone would seek such a situation is beyond me. But such is the world of the transgender.

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Yes, it is that time of year when the transgender community starts whining about the Michigan's Womyn's Music Festival. Historically the Festival has a "womyn born womyn" policy that has been interpreted as excluding HBS women. In more recent years, that policy has been relaxed somewhat, and it stated as a matter of conscience, not a rigid policy. Of course, HBS women have attended the festival over the years. The real issue is the presence of transgender people who claim to identify as women.

In a recent article on Bilerico, the author states "In my personal opinion, if one feels as though he or she has been born into the wrong body than that's enough to qualify as Trans, or the new, less technical term GenderQueer." Such a statement is, in my personal opinion, highly offensive. The only criteria by which a person qualifies as "Trans" or worse, "GenderQueer" is if that person chooses to identify as such. I do not, and personally I consider having either term forced on me to be highly offensive.

He goes on to state, "Although The Womyn's Music Festival vows to not do any "panty checks" it seems as though the inclusion of Transpeople to a festival like this would have to be all or nothing. Being pre-op, half-op or even post-operation male-to-female transgender simply cannot matter. Who is to say that being pre or post op makes one more or less of a woman? You simply can't." He has a point, though he misses a bigger one. While a person who has Harry Benjamin Syndrome but who has not had surgery is still mentally a woman, there are a large number of men who call themselves "pre-op" who actually have no intention of ever having surgery to become female. They are not, in my opinion (and in the opinion of the vast majority of society) women, and never will be. So yes, surgical status does make a difference. I can certainly understand the MWMF not wanting to allow so-called "women with penises" into their midst. If a woman with HBS can assimilate well enough to attend, and she is sufficient identified as a woman to not feel the need to inform people that she was born male, then I see no reason why she should have a problem attending. And quick frankly, many have done just that. And any so-called "pre-op" who would wish to impose his self on such a gathering does not belong there anyway.

And no, that is not "passing" as many transgender types love to claim. The term "passing" implies that one is fooling people into believing that one is something they really aren't. But then, that is the whole point. For an HBS woman, it is not fooling someone. It is simply being what they are. Of course, I realize some can't quite grasp that.

Now, personally, I don't agree with a lot of the views of the founders of the MWMF, but I can understand why they might feel the way they do. Ironically, the person who caused a lot of this controversy could have simply kept her mouth shut. By telling her past, she raises questions as to whether or not she is really a woman.

Still, the bottom line is, this group does have a right to associate with who they wish to. Personally, I would not wish to attend this event. It is simply not my cup of tea. But that is a my feeling, and other women feel differently. In fact, a close friend, a "woman born woman" who is lesbian-identified went this year.

The bottom line is, many of those who are the most upset about being excluded are, ironically, the very sort of person I can understand them wanting to exclude. And the real irony is, I bet those who are the most upset have no comprehension of that irony.

Monday, July 21, 2008

One of the things you can absolutely count on is that anyone who dares disagree with gender facists is going to be attacked, beaten down, and silenced as much as possible. A recent example of this occured when Cathryn Plantine dare to speak her mind on one of the more notorious gender fascist's blogs. She was banned, her diary was deleted, along with not only ever comment she had made, but also every comment that anyone had made in response to those comments.What she said, that send them into a fury was this, "It is my belief that the excesses of those pushing the transgender agenda are becoming so apparent they have sown the seeds of their own eventual destruction…..and anyone who demands entry into women’s space as a trans anything is exhibiting absolute alpha male behavior. Women belong in women’s space, if you don’t come there as a woman, you absolutely do not belong there."Of course, that was too much truth for the likes of Autumn Sandeen, Monica Helms, and Marti Abernathy. They immediately went ballistic and started screaming for Cathryn's head on a platter.As a result of her making this remark, she was banned from "Pam's House Blend" which bills itself as "An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community." Apparently they have a rather strange view of what constitutes reality. I think their definition pretty much boils down to "Reality is anything we agree with..."Now, Pam makes such lofty statement as "The LGBT community is obviously not monolithic. Issues of concern to one element may not resonate with another, be it race, gender, gender expression or position on the political spectrum. What unites us all is that the hearty portion of the larger society is demonizing us," and "The Blend is about community, civility and friendly debate. It's never going to be highbrow content at the Blend, but it is always newsworthy and I like to mix up the fun and the political quite a bit -- as long as it makes people think." Of course, that is only true as long as you toe the party line. Step out of line, and you get tossed, and everything you had written previously gets tossed with you. And this is the case, not only at Pam's House Blend, but at numerous other TG blog sites as well. Oh well...as I say, the beat (down) goes on...and on....and on...and on...

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Word is out that the American Psychological Association has appointed Kenneth Zucker and Ray Blanchard to the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders working group to help revise the DSM-V. This means that two men who are notorious for their dislike of women with HBS (formerly refered to as transsexualism) will play a major role in defining how those people are viewed by the psychiatric community.

Simply put, this is an outrage.

Zucker has a long history of trying to use what is referred to as "reparative therapy" to bully male children who exhibit early signs of possible HBS into accepting a male identity. And Blanchard is notorious for his ridiculous theories that try to classify all transsexuals as either homosexual or autogynephillic, as well as his notorious comments that post-op transsexuals are men without penises. His theories are a direct attack on the concepts behind HBS.

Putting these men on this group is a direct slap at women with HBS, and an outrage. There appears to be little balance to this panel, and it looks like it may be a much longer time before any real progress is made towards a more accurate view of HBS.

Monday, March 31, 2008

No, it's not an April Fool's joke. The story is making the rounds about a "pregnant man." But all is not as it seems.

There has been a lot of buzz in the media lately about Thomas Beatie, who is being touted as a pregnant "man." This is just the lastest example of the silliness that is the transgender paradigm. Beatie is a female to male transgender person. What Beatie is not, is a pregnant man. Beatie is a woman who, having undergone hormone therapy, and chest surgery, appears to be a man, but Beatie never had any surgery to remove the female reproductive system.

Because Beatie's partner had undergone a hysterectomy, they decided that in order to have a child, "he" would have to carry the pregnancy. So, Beatie stopped taking testosterone, and after "his" periods returned, "he" became pregnant.

Give me a break!

This is not a pregant man. Now, one of my best friends, now deceased, was an FTM who had a child from before he transitioned. He grew up in a time and place where he saw no hope of ever being able to have a normal life, and like some with HBS, he married, and tried to have a normal life. And for him, that included having a child. It should be noted that during labor, there were complications because my friend's pelvis was too small for the child to pass easily through. It was a very difficult birth. Quite literally, he was built like a man more than like a woman.

But that is different. Beatie is not someone trying to cope with things that are not fully understood. This is a person who has claimed to have dealt with "his" gender issues. But, like many who are properly classed as transgender, as opposed to HBS, Beatie wants to have it all.

Some might praise Beatie for "sacrificing" for his family. But given that Beatie is telling his story for any and all to hear, it does not appear to be that much of a sacrifice.

But all of this raises all sorts of troubling questions about the transgender paradigm.

I know many will applaud this as a great step forward in the battle to put an end to the bi-gender paradigm. They will say it represents a breakthrough in the battle for transgender rights. They will praise how this is a step forward.

Personally, I think it is a nightmare.

This is the sort of thing the Religious Right lives for. The articles are flowing from their websites. Here, they have proof that the "transgender" crowd is a bunch of kooks. This gives them something that can show that "transgender" people are just making stuff up. And, of course, the transgender crowd keeps insisting that we are all the same, so to the Religious Right, and to a lot of other people, this begins to serve as evidence that we aren't truly who, and what we know ourselves to be.

One of the biggest problems with this case is that Beatie has apparently had "his" sex legally changed on "his" birth certificate. This illustrates a major problem with such laws. This sort of thing should only be allowed where someone has actually changed their sex. In Beatie's case, "he" had chest surgery, but no modifications were made to "his" genitalia or reproductive organs. Now, in most states, this would raise some serious questions about how whether or not "he" had met the legal requirements to change "his" birth certificate. I certainly don't believe "he" should have been allowed to do so as long as "he" retains the ability to conceive and carry a child.Men don't get pregnant. At least not in the real world. But in the fantasy world of the "transgender" such things are not only possible, but they are to be bragged about, and publicized. Beatie will have "his" 15 minutes of fame. But the damage this person is doing will last a lot longer.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

I grew up in Alabama during the Sixties. I saw a lot of things first hand that many have only read about in history books or seen in old documentaries. When I took my daughter to the Civil Rights Museum, the first thing you see on entering the exhibits is a recreation of a segregated water fountain. One side is marked Whites, and the other side is marked Colored. As we approached, I was thinking how thankful I was those days were past. My daughter, on the other hand, turned to me in absolute shock, and asked "You mean they really had things like that?" I was thankful it was something she could see with such horror.

Recently, I have encountered some things that remind me of those days. I have seen something that shows the same sort of hatred expressed by the worst villains of those days. A place that is dominated by the same desire to control those who would dissent as shown by Bull Connor, when he turned fire hoses on young demonstrators.

And the saddest part is, all of this is from someone who wishes to be seen as speaking in the spirit of Martin Luther King, Jr.

I've since discovered that Sue Robins is one of those white transsexual separatists that I've been tangling with in various online transgender groups since the late 90's. Before Istart the fun and festivities taking this e-mail apart and rebutting her WBT azz(and in this case the WBT stands for weak-minded belligerent transsexual) enjoythis music video from Jill Scott for her hit song 'Hate on Me'.

Now the above shows several characteristics of Roberts' style of writing. The first is the obsession with race. Everything for Roberts, revolves around race. A very confrontational style that includes personal attacks on anyone who has the "audacity" to disagree. A bitter hatred of anyone who is successful in their transiton. And a tendency to write in ebonics.

If you follow the link, which is in the original article, you find even more examples of this:

One of the things that's been a contentious issue ever since I transitioned in 1994 and have been around the transgender community is this ongoing battle between the pre-ops/non-ops and post-ops.

Frankly, that's more of a white transwoman thang that I try to stay out of, but here's my take on this asinine mess.

Again, one finds race as a central theme, along with the rather odd use of ebonics. But it gets worse:

Much of the sniping between the two groups has several elements to it. But the major bone of contention between the pre and post-ops is over the word 'transgender'.The reason a majority of people in the community use it is because it's an inclusive umbrella term for the entire diverse community of gender variant people.The post-ops usual argument is that the pre/non-ops haven't worked hard enough to save money like 'they' did to have GRS (genital reconfiguration surgery), so don't hate on them. They can't (or won't) understand why any transsexual would want to keep that 'ugh' male organ.

Again, we see the bitter hatred of post-ops. But this is relatively mild, compared to what comes next:

Post -ops also assert that they are being lumped in with the transgender community 'against their will' and it keeps 'them' from being accepted by natal females as women. They claim that one day the 'silent majority' of post-ops will revolt against this 'oppressive' situation and not only start their own movement, but push for laws that give rights only to transgender people who have completed surgery.

Yo, did y'all consider the fact that the reason y'all have problems being accepted as women is because of all that WMP that you're still clutching on to like a wino holding his last bottle of MD 20/20?

Here Roberts begins attacking post women in earnest. Funny, in a way, that a person who displays so much male arrogance would attack some for "White Male Privilelge." Again, we see Roberts' two favorite themes, the evils of white people and the evils of post-ops.

But, you haven't seen anything yet...

On the flip side, the pre/non-op argument is that the post ops are not only wrong, but are selfish, arrogant and bitter people who have not only turned their backs on their less fortunate sisters, but have forgotten where they came from. The pre/non-ops also assert that ignoring the fact that many peeps can't have GRS for medical reasons is callous, and the 'just work hard and save for GRS' argument, while I agree with it in principle, the fact that this line is almost always spouted by white post-ops and ignores the reality that transpeople of color live with. We don't have the access to the financial resources that many of these former white males did.

Again, white people who are post-op are portrayed as villans. And reality is ignored. The simple fact is, there are virtually zero cases where medical issues are a permanent bar to sex affirmation surgery. This excuse is used a lot, but it is fraudulent. It is probably rooted in the past, when such issues were real. At one time, anything from something as serious as being HIV positive, to something as trivial as being diabetic, could prevent one from having surgery. But, as medical professionals have recognized that SAS is not simply a cosmetic procedure that can be held back without problems, they have been more willing to operate on those with medical issues.

But, as Roberts gets warmed up, things from bad to worse, to so downright bad that it actually becomes comical...

One pattern I continue to see with some white post ops is that they blitz through the real life test and go straight to the table for surgery. They they wonder why and get mad because they spent $10K for a neocoochie and got 'sirred', while a non-op with five incles of neoclit in her lace panites gets treated as a female.

A major reason is that because GRS for some pre/non-ops will happen about the same time George W. Bush gets nominated for a Nobel Peace prize and they know it, the pre/non-op spends more time focusing and perfecting the internal and spiritual aspects of femininity.

Again, we see race as an issue. One wonders about African-American HBS women who "blitz through the real life test." Would the same be true for them? But what is really telling is Roberts' disdainful references to "neocoochie" and getting sirred and non-ops getting treated as a female. Again, Roberts either lives a very protected life, or is totally delusional. While it is true that some people rush into surgery, and have regrets, few transgenders who have an aversion to surgery are likely to be treated as females, at least outside of their own social circles. One only has to spend some time in San Francisco's Tenderloin and Polk Gulch areas to put that silliness to rest.

Let me offer one final quote from this particular set as an example of Roberts' viewpoint:

Anybody with positive cash flow can get an improved femalebody, but femininty is a learned, spiritual, constantly evolving journey. Youaren't going to master it (if you ever do) if you're more concerned aboutgetting the earliest possible surgery date or stressing because you didn't getthe day you wanted for your facial feminization surgery consultation.

Here Roberts is self-contradicting. After ranting about how wrong it is to point out that it is relatively easy to get surgery if you really want it, and that those who don't have it, don't want it, Roberts seems to confirm this point. This leads me to suspect that Roberts has had surgery, but has serious regrets. But the comments about how femininty is learned, and is constantly evolving journey, shows that Roberts has no real experience of having been born with a female mind in a male body. No doubt, this is at the heart of the attacks on successful transsexual women. This sort of thing is reminiscent of other such people, like "Willow Arune," who is notorious as a staunch defender of Michael Bailey and Ray Blanchard. Arune has not met anyone who hates transsexuals that Arune does not dearly love.

This article could go on for far longer, just quoting Roberts's hateful remarks, but I will offer one final one to sum up:

I chuckle because every time these peeps post their vitriolic crap (which I delete) in a vain attempt to quote unquote 'try to make me look bad', they're missing the mark. They need to look in the mirror (if it doesn't break first) to ascertain who this is really hurting. You're making yourselves look like the peeps that not only need Jesus, but need straitjackets and prescription medication as well.

Actually, Roberts needs no help in looking bad, and would do well to practice, rather than preach. Roberts is filled with pride, but fears criticism. Like so many of the gender facists, Roberts will delete anything that is remotely well written. It is not the vitrolic crap that gets deleted, but well written challenges to Robert's rhetoric.

Roberts, in many ways, reminds me of a member of the Klan I was introduced to once. The man was filled with hatred to the point that he could not think rationally. When any of his positions were challenged, he would either launch off into a rant, or make an assertion that the Bible backed him up. If you asked him to tell you where, he would begin stalling, and then say something to the effect of "I can't remember the exact chapter and verse, but it's in there...in the Psalms I believe." Just out of curiosity, I tried to find anything remotely like what he claimed to be citing, and couldn't. Like Roberts apparently does, he simply made up stuff to suit his own hateful view.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Over on one of the leading Gender Fascist's blogs, in the middle of a very nasty debate, another Gender Fascist made a very hateful comment about HBS women, referring to them as having "after-market (insert “fake”) vaginas." This fellow went on to say, "The new vagina can only get your birth certificate changed in only 47 states. However, in those same 47 states, you can also get it changed with an orkie, because as you say, that is the “primary sex organ.” The doctors consider that a “gender altering operation.” I know several trans women who only have an orkie and are just as legal as any HBS person."Now, in the same comment, this gentleman also asserts, "...are you aware that after many years of hormones, a trans woman’s penis shrinks the size of that of a pre-pubesent boy and no longer works, or is no longer sensitive? I know of some trans men whose clitoris has grown to the size that my penis has shrunk to. We’re meeting somewhere in the middle."Now, as ridiculous, and admittedly hilarious, as the above is, it does contain some serious, and potentially harmful, misinformation.No it is true that there are three states, Ohio, Tennessee, and Idaho that will not make any change of sex on a birth certificate. There are ongoing efforts to change these laws. In the rest of the states, exactly what is changed, and how that change is represented varies. Some states actually add a note in the margin noting the change, others issue a new birth certificate and seal the old one.But what is seriously bad information above, is the claim that all 47 states will accept an orchidectomy as being sufficient to change the birth certificate. That is not remotely true. It is true that some have found doctors who are willing to issue misleading documents, and who have then used those documents to illegally change their birth certificates. I knew one person, some years ago, you went so far as to actually forge a doctor's statement and use that to have "her" driver's license changed in Alabama (they will not change the sex marker on a license until after SRS).Now, the Gender Fascist in question takes a statement by Harry Benjamin, and uses that to make a claim that is both misleading and dangerous. In strictly medical terms, the testes and ovaries are referred to as the "primary" sex organs. This has a rather specific meaning, and has nothing to do with the questions above. In the eyes of the law, a penis equals male, whether or not the testes have been removed. Trying to get around that can result in a charge of perjury. Now, there have been some rare cases, I know of one alleged to have happened in California, where a judge has knowingly allowed the change of a birth certificate where full surgery has not occured. That ruling is of questionable legality, but the person involved was honest with the judge, and would not be subject to legal penalties. The order might be overturned, but that is about all that could happen.But if someone goes to court, and knowingly files a misleading statement, they, and the doctor issuing the statement that sex altering surgery has taken place, could be subject to perjury. An orchidectomy simply does not change the sexual characteristics of a person. But, this is the sort of thing that gender deconstructionists wish to push. The person who made these statements has made it clear that he does not intend to seek surgery. He believes that one can simply declare oneself to be a man or a woman, regardless of one's physical sex.

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

One of the latest twists from the transgender crowd is to label those who identify with the term "Harry Benjamin Syndrome," who do now wish to be labeled as "transgender," or who generally disagree with the idea that one is a woman (or a man) simply and solely because one says so, as "Gender Fundamentalists." Okay, then I think it would be perfectly fair to henceforth label those transgender activists who insist on trying to force their views on us as "Gender Fascists."

That i certainly how some of them act. If you are not willing to march lockstep to their drumbeat of transgender ideology, at the very least they will insult and belittle you. At worst, they will do whatever they can to silence you. If they can find out sufficient information, they will actually go as far as harrassing people, including outing them, or trying to cause problems for them in other ways.

Sometimes, the Gender Fascists can become downright silly. They post statements to the effect that those who wish to decline to be referred to as "transgender" are "delusional," or "only fooling themselves," but then at the same time, they say that they are not trying to force anyone to adopt that term.

Now some might, quite naively, ask why it matters? After all, aren't these activists just striving to win rights for people? Isn't there strength in numbers? Some will say, "If we don't hang together, we will all hang separately..." Others will say, "United we stand, divided we fall." But this misses the simple fact that you cannot have unity if you are forcing a label on people against their will. And, at least for those with HBS, unity is counter-productive. The rights that we need are NOT the same rights that are needed by people who are transgender.

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Something interesting has happened recently. In several blogs, the topics of Harry Benjamin Syndrome and what is referred to has "transsexual separatism" have come under attack from "transgender" activists.They are adamant that those who do not wish to be referred to as "transgender" have on choice but to accept this label, even hurling insults at those who object. They seem to fear the very idea that someone might not wish to be called "transgender."What could possibly be leading to this behavior?A lot of transsexuals have never been happy with being labeled transgender. There are several reasons for this. Some feel the term is inaccurate, as they do not change their gender. Others prefer to not be lumped in with groups they feel they have nothing in common with. And many are uncomfortable with certain ideas that are becoming associate with "transgender," such as "gender deconstruction," and the rejection of "binary gender."And now, they have become vocal enough that the transgender activists have taken notice. And they are very upset. And it appears that battle lines are being drawn between what is becoming known as the "deconstructionists," and the "separatists."One, particularly outspoken activists went so far as to refer to the separatists as "gender fundamentalists." That is particularly ironic. The "deconstructionists" are the ones who are clinging to outdated ideas, who reject scientific evidence, and who insist on forcing labels onto people.What are they afraid of? Perhaps they fear losing some of their numbers? They certainly try to extend the definition of "transgender" to the point that it is almost meaningless. But, more likely, they fear the truth. I think they fear the public realizing that many of them are trying to subvert society. And I think they fear facing the truth about themselves.

About Me

Copyright Notice

All original content of this blog is copyright 2017 by J.U. and all rights are reserved.

Comment Policy

Just so there is no confusion, and to make sure that certain gender fascists cannot make false claims, I want to make clear my policy concerning comments. The only rule, and it is a hard and fast one, is "NO INVASIONS OF PRIVACY!" That is, if you post information about me, such as my name, or other private information, your post will not see the light of day. After having a couple of rather nasty trolls try to get around this, I have had to do something I really dislike. Because Blogger does not allow me to block individuals, I now have to approve all comments. But, if your comment does not violate the one rule, it will be approved. So please, don't go running to someone and claim you were censored...especially someone with an established history of censoring posts to prevent actually having to defend his silliness...